A few more questions after experiments.. Options

[hyphz]

The players certainly are going for hyperspecialists. Did I mention that the guy who fired the Full Auto burst had an Automatics pool of 21 (Exceptional Attribute Agility, Enhanced Physical Attribute Agility, Aptitude Automatics, Specialization, Smartlink)?

This kind of brings me on to another issue in that first I don't really know what the effects of that will be. I mean sure with Automatics, he hits really well, but another player did the same with Infiltration. Can someone with hyper Inflitration just walk past a guard in a corridor unnoticed? Part of me says no, he shouldn't be allowed to dice every problem to death; part of me says yes, because his ability is so off the chart that to restrict it to what I can visualise is unreasonable. I'm thinking of that story about the locked car that got turned around..

The other thing is that I was going to do On The Run for a first adventure and I really don't know how they'll get through the first major scene (no spoilers please, my players may read this). Maybe they'll come up with something creative, good for them. Maybe they'll realise that the skill sets they've chosen aren't ideal, good for them. But on the other hand I figure they're making their characters this way because that's what they want to play and it might just put them off the game entirely. Should I finagle things to match their specializations? Problem is, at those pool sizes that's just lining up the ducks in the gallery.

[LurkerOutThere]

Just as your players shouldn't be allowed to shoot their way through every problem there's some situations where even batman can't make a stealthy entrance without getting creative. The manned checkpoint in a well lighted hallways is a fairly good example of that.

Of course that's not to say that there's not other ways for a stealthy character to get around that. Finding a air vent big enough to crawl through bypassing the sensors and physical protections on said vent and then going is a good option. No single skill should do everything but a multitude should find an answer to most problems.

[Glyph]

This kind of brings me on to another issue in that first I don't really know what the effects of that will be. I mean sure with Automatics, he hits really well, but another player did the same with Infiltration. Can someone with hyper Inflitration just walk past a guard in a corridor unnoticed? Part of me says no, he shouldn't be allowed to dice every problem to death; part of me says yes, because his ability is so off the chart that to restrict it to what I can visualise is unreasonable. I'm thinking of that story about the locked car that got turned around..

The main thing high dice pools do is let you succeed consistently, and in the face of high negative modifiers. But I don't see them as breaking the law of physics or common sense. All skills should have hard limits. And there should be things they simply can't do, no matter how many successes you get. On the other hand, when you combine high skill with creative players, a lot more becomes possible. Walking right past that guard might be more feasible if the character steals a janitor's cart and walks by mumbling about that big mess in the exec bathroom.

[suoq]

I suspect you'll find that hyper-specialists create their own problems.

The stealthy guy in now separated from the team and can't hack, con, shoot, or do anything more than sneak out.
The gunman will be bored the entire time the stealthy guy is sneaking because he'll do nothing.

It's one of the reasons I dislike playing the hacker. I know that the process is long, involves a lot of dice rolling, and bores everyone else at the table. Hyperspecialists don't work together, they work one at a time, so with 5 hyper-specialized players, most of the time 4 players are surfing the net.

[Draco18s]

I suspect you'll find that hyper-specialists create their own problems.

The stealthy guy in now separated from the team and can't hack, con, shoot, or do anything more than sneak out.
The gunman will be bored the entire time the stealthy guy is sneaking because he'll do nothing.

It's one of the reasons I dislike laying the hacker. I know that the process is long, involves a lot of dice rolling, and bores everyone else at the table. Hyperspecialists don't work together, they work one at a time, so with 5 hyper-specialized players, most of the time 4 players are surfing the net.

This.
It's ok to hyperspecialize once in a while, but you need other skills too.

[Yerameyahu]

It's kind of adorable that your newbies are making all these classic mistakes, hyphz, but you get the opportunity to educate them! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[suoq]

I don't think they're mistakes. The characters are well made for the challenges. The challenges are single events, not a line of connected events. The problem (IMO) isn't that the answers are wrong, it's that the tests are wrong. If all that matters is combat then, yes, 4 IPs and a fistful of dice is the right answer. When asked to create characters for an adventure that incorporates all of the tests, I'm willing to give them odds that they make good balanced characters given the available tools.

Note that with the Chummer character generator, you can specify what books they can use in the options. It may save them some time.
http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=34674

[hyphz]

We're using Chummer, although it seems to have some slightly odd maths at some times.

Oh, also, what's the deal with all the sample characters being allergic to gold? Is it some kind of D&D-based joke?

LurkerOutThere, I'm interested by your .sig - what are the common GM errors with the magic/matrix rules that you're referring to?

[UmaroVI]

The sample characters are terrible, I suggest looking at them as little as possible. They were forged in the fires of failure and sadness, and tempered in the waters of poor understanding of the rules.

[Rubic]

The sample characters are terrible, I suggest looking at them as little as possible. They were forged in the fires of failure and sadness, and tempered in the waters of poor understanding of the rules.

In other words, prior to munckining little weasels like us getting ahold of the rules, having our way, and not calling back afterwards? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[LurkerOutThere]

LurkerOutThere, I'm interested by your .sig - what are the common GM errors with the magic/matrix rules that you're referring to?

Things people forget about magic:
Perception 6-Force test to notice active magic.
The police take magically related crimes much much more seriously then they do regular.
Spells require foci, foci requires permits, getting caught knowing a spell you don't have a permit for runs you afoul of the above. All mages are supposed to be registered. See above.
[quote]

There's other stuff but i'm in the middle of something right now. Maybe at some point i'll do up a post for posterity.

[Yerameyahu]

Spells don't *require* foci, and foci are category-specific, not spell-specific. They'd have to directly observe you using a bad spell (or maybe find your signature, I forget how that works).

[Hida Tsuzua]

In other words, prior to munckining little weasels like us getting ahold of the rules, having our way, and not calling back afterwards? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

They were pretty bad and more illegal to boot back then too. If "if I want to be good at something I should have at least soft cap my attribute, have a high skill!" is munchkin, then I guess nearly everyone is munchkin (except TJ).

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

They were pretty bad and more illegal to boot back then too. If "if I want to be good at something I should have at least soft cap my attribute, have a high skill!" is munchkin, then I guess nearly everyone is munchkin (except TJ).

Never doubt that I CAN Munchkin with the best of them. I just see no reason to do so, as I have a lot more fun with the flavor of the character rather than the hard mechanics. Thanks for the nod, though, Hida Tsuzua... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Glyph]

They were pretty bad and more illegal to boot back then too. If "if I want to be good at something I should have at least soft cap my attribute, have a high skill!" is munchkin, then I guess nearly everyone is munchkin (except TJ).

I think the terms munchkin and powergamer are used too often. Most often to describe a player who, in a game where you play magical or augmented elite covert expediters, creates a magical or augmented elite covert expediter.

[Rubic]

Never doubt that I CAN Munchkin with the best of them. I just see no reason to do so, as I have a lot more fun with the flavor of the character rather than the hard mechanics. Thanks for the nod, though, Hida Tsuzua... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

I'm with you on this. I much prefer flavor over power levels. Unfortunately, most I've gamed with have led me to go concept, min max, THEN flavor. My latest character I've been graced with some bonus points for drawing a picture and helping the GM out with a few things. Unfortunately, with a month to go before the game starts, I'm already facing the not-so-veiled threats of other players. Thank Dog I can pretty easily whether most of those threats (esp with extra build points).

[Yerameyahu]

On the other hand, there's no special prize (or praise) due for making your character weak. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Weakness isn't flavor, fun, etc. Power isn't necessarily un-fun or flavorless. Don't being a Magic 2 snob. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

On the other hand, there's no special prize (or praise) due for making your character weak. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Weakness isn't flavor, fun, etc. Power isn't necessarily un-fun or flavorless. Don't being a Magic 2 snob. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

One man's Weakness is another Man's Strength... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[suoq]

Why do people think that creating a cost effective character AND creating an interesting character with flavor are polar opposites in competition with each other?

Creating an interesting character does NOT mean creating a weak character. Creating an effective character does not mean that you're playing a batch of numbers. They're two different points on two different scales and it is possible to focus on both.

[Rubic]

Why do people think that creating a cost effective character AND creating an interesting character with flavor are polar opposites in competition with each other?

Creating an interesting character does NOT mean creating a weak character. Creating an effective character does not mean that you're playing a batch of numbers. They're two different points on two different scales and it is possible to focus on both.

Part of it is that the fluff doesn't necessarily pan out when applied to character concpets. 2 is the standard human average, boosted per metahuman base stats. Characters need to be able to fill some sort of niche, and having 4 dice (stat + skill) really won't usually cut it. heck, having just soft-capped dice won't always cut it depending on your GM. Sometimes the only way to get the GM to understand just how possible it is for your runner to do something is to haul out a massive pool of dice and see if he feels lucky. So, no, in concept you won't need 24 dice to shoot somebody, or to negotiate your run. But sometimes, in reality, those 24 dice are the only way to tell your GM "Yes I can."

[ggodo]

Part of it is that the fluff doesn't necessarily pan out when applied to character concpets. 2 is the standard human average, boosted per metahuman base stats. Characters need to be able to fill some sort of niche, and having 4 dice (stat + skill) really won't usually cut it. heck, having just soft-capped dice won't always cut it depending on your GM. Sometimes the only way to get the GM to understand just how possible it is for your runner to do something is to haul out a massive pool of dice and see if he feels lucky. So, no, in concept you won't need 24 dice to shoot somebody, or to negotiate your run. But sometimes, in reality, those 24 dice are the only way to tell your GM "Yes I can."

The thresholds in the books are a bit more fair than how d20 does some of its stuff. I swear it expects you to have all 18s at level 1 sometimes. Besides, human average is 3, I believe. That's statistically one hit rolling attribute, add in whatever skill you have and you may pick up another, more if you're at a high skill. It also depends on the skill. 2 hits in combat isn't going to do much. 2 hits on a jump check and you'll leap 4 meters horizontal. climb check will get you 2 meters. It's not awesome, but faster than I climb in 3 seconds. D&D assumes you've got better than average human stats in order to complete simple tasks.

[Glyph]

I think some people also interpret the fluff in different ways, both the hyperbole at the upper end of the skill descriptions, and the unfortunate choice of words in describing a skill of 3 as "professional". The problem with the latter, is that a professional shadowrunner is a different beast than a professional beat cop or army grunt. They're not the only ones, either. A typical Ancients go-ganger will have a vehicle skill of 5, an typical street doc will have a cybertechnology skill of 5, and a typical doctorate will have a knowledge skill of 6.

Some people might look at a skill of 6 and say "Wow, that's how good people like Matador are! My character probably isn't that good!" I would look at it and think "My character is focused on combat. He does things like acquire targets or reload instinctively, and his gun is practically an extension of his hand. He spends regular time at the range, and also uses his gun in actual combat situations fairly often." After all, I assume that if the rules let you take either two skills at 5 or one skill at 6, that it is acceptable to do so. One of the examples of character creation does just that, in fact. And in the vignette before the skills section, a generalist and a one-trick pony are contrasted, with the implication that both of them have their niche in the shadowrunning world.

That's assuming a default-level shadowrun game, of course. Lower powered games by all means should set more limits. The problem with 400 BP, and even with higher or lower levels of points, is that you can go all up and down the power scale, depending on your concept.

[Elfenlied]

@OP:

1. Like everyone else said, going adept for IP is not worth it, even with the DP penalty to heal checks. Heals through First Aid cap at your skill anyway.

2. Your troll is doing it wrong. If he has access to heavy (SWAT,Fullbody or Milspec) armor, and the right ware, he can take a full auto burst without dying. But yes, combat in SR is deadly, and supposed to be.

3. Best way to handle it would be to allow everyone caught in the blast a standard dodge roll.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

I think some people also interpret the fluff in different ways, both the hyperbole at the upper end of the skill descriptions, and the unfortunate choice of words in describing a skill of 3 as "professional". The problem with the latter, is that a professional shadowrunner is a different beast than a professional beat cop or army grunt. They're not the only ones, either. A typical Ancients go-ganger will have a vehicle skill of 5, an typical street doc will have a cybertechnology skill of 5, and a typical doctorate will have a knowledge skill of 6.

Some people might look at a skill of 6 and say "Wow, that's how good people like Matador are! My character probably isn't that good!" I would look at it and think "My character is focused on combat. He does things like acquire targets or reload instinctively, and his gun is practically an extension of his hand. He spends regular time at the range, and also uses his gun in actual combat situations fairly often." After all, I assume that if the rules let you take either two skills at 5 or one skill at 6, that it is acceptable to do so. One of the examples of character creation does just that, in fact. And in the vignette before the skills section, a generalist and a one-trick pony are contrasted, with the implication that both of them have their niche in the shadowrunning world.

That's assuming a default-level shadowrun game, of course. Lower powered games by all means should set more limits. The problem with 400 BP, and even with higher or lower levels of points, is that you can go all up and down the power scale, depending on your concept.

I think that it comes down to what people expect from the system. For me, when I see that the majority of the Upper-end, published opposition throws from 12-17 Dice (The Elite Tir Ghost can throw from 15-17 Dice in Firearms Skills (Pre Tacnet), IIRC), I tend to think that the fluff is accurate. 12-15 Dice in your primaries is sufficient in that case. If your table experiences opposition that is consistently at 20+ Dice, well, then your characters will likely fall into that category as well. I have been playing SR4 since its debut, and have seen absolutely no need for a character with 20+ Dice. There is really just no call for it. The only thing that 20+ Dice does in game is minimize or eliminate failure, which to me is boring. If you can never fail, why are you even rolling dice? The purpose of the game is to provide a setting for a story. To me, at least, there is nothing more boring than having a character that never fails at anything. If you cannot actually fail, then there is no drama, no risk. I like the Story that develops from success and failure.

[Draco18s]

2 is the standard human average, boosted per metahuman base stats.

Actually no, it's 3.